Perspective Paper

CONSEQUENTIALISM PERSPECTIVE

“To gain a sense of why it is important to subject morality to philosophical inquiry, we should view morality, not as a collection of rules, but as a set of guidelines that we must apply to the very complex circumstances of our lives.” (Furrow, 2005)As such, each of the theories discussed in CRJU 250 have their strengths and weaknesses, and serve as base – not an absolute - for resolving ethical dilemma. There does not appear to be one all-inclusive theory of moral reasoning.

The consequentialist perspective is frequently recognized as Utilitarianism. It posits that the right action/decision in an ethical dilemma is that which provides the most positive outcome to the most individuals/organizations involved. The focus is on choosing the action that brings the most pleasure, rather than pain, to all those affected. Thus the consequences of an action determine its moral value; this perspective is focused on the effect. This theory replaces common sense with its focus on thinking about the facts regarding the consequences of the action. Similar to other perspectives, with consequentialism, the person making the decision must avoid desires and emotions, and act objectively.

Main theorists: Jeremy Bentham (Classical School) and John Stuart Mills.

Problems: It is difficult to predict the future, i.e. the consequences with certainty. Also, “does the end justify the means?” – is it alright to sacrifice a few, the minority, for the good of the majority? Similarly, how does the person making the decision know what is good for different, diverse groups and/or individuals?

Steps (Banks, 2009)

1. Identify all the options

2. Identify all those affected by the decision (individuals, Organizations, and the Community)

3. List and describe all the harms and benefits - to all the options and all those affected within each option

4. Choose the option that produces the most benefits for all those affected after calculating the difference between the harmful and beneficial effects.

REFERENCES

Banks, C. (2009). Criminal Justice Ethics: Theory and Practice, 2nd Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Furrow, D. (2005). Ethics: Key Concepts in Philosophy. New York: Continuum Books.

Unknown author. (No date). Terms In and Types of Ethical Theory. Drexel University. Retrieved June 14, 2010 from http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~cp28/ethterm.htm.